| Literature DB >> 35009726 |
Sami Bourouis1, Yogesh Pawar2, Nizar Bouguila2.
Abstract
Finite Gamma mixture models have proved to be flexible and can take prior information into account to improve generalization capability, which make them interesting for several machine learning and data mining applications. In this study, an efficient Gamma mixture model-based approach for proportional vector clustering is proposed. In particular, a sophisticated entropy-based variational algorithm is developed to learn the model and optimize its complexity simultaneously. Moreover, a component-splitting principle is investigated, here, to handle the problem of model selection and to prevent over-fitting, which is an added advantage, as it is done within the variational framework. The performance and merits of the proposed framework are evaluated on multiple, real-challenging applications including dynamic textures clustering, objects categorization and human gesture recognition.Entities:
Keywords: Gamma mixtures; component splitting; entropy; gesture recognition; objects categorization; texture clustering; variational Bayes
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 35009726 PMCID: PMC8749844 DOI: 10.3390/s22010186
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Sample snapshots from different categories of the DynTex dataset.
Overall accuracy ( standard error) of dynamic texture clustering of different approaches using SIFT features on the DynTex dataset.
| Approach | Average Accuracy (%) ± Standard Error | Average Time (S) |
|---|---|---|
| GM-Split | 86.11 ± 1.21 | 4.26 |
| GM-En | 86.34 ± 1.13 | 4.22 |
| GaM-VB | 88.27 ± 1.09 | 3.56 |
|
| 93.40 ± 1.03 | 1.64 |
Figure 2Sample frames of hand gesture from Cambridge-Gesture dataset.
Figure 3Sample frames of body gestures (gesture classes) from the UMD Keck body-gesture dataset.
The average recognition rate (standard error) of hand gestures, using different approaches, performed on Cambridge-Gesture dataset.
| Approach | Average Accuracy (%) | Average Time (S) |
|---|---|---|
| GM-Split | 85.25 ± 1.33 | 2.21 |
| GM-En | 85.28 ± 1.24 | 2.33 |
| GaM-VB | 87.37 ± 1.09 | 3.18 |
|
| 91.66 ± 0.91 | 1.59 |
Figure 4Sample from the Caltech dataset. From left to right: Bikes, Faces, Planes, Camels.
Figure 5Sample from the GHIM10K dataset. From left to right: Boats, Cars, Flowers, Bugs.
Results of object categorization using different models (average standard error (Average time (S))).
| Datasets/Method | GaM-En (Proposed Method) | GaM-VB | GM-En | GM-Split |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Caltech256 | 97.84 ± 0.86 (2.11) | 94.32 ± 1.14 (2.99) | 92.97 ± 1.09 (2.28) | 92.91 ± 1.10 (2.18) |
| GHIM10K | 97.02 ± 0.92 (2.89) | 95.37 ± 1.18 (3.11) | 93.33 ± 1.13 (2.97) | 93.17 ± 1.15 (2.93) |